Phase diagram of a classical fluid in a quenched random potential

Europhysics Letters

Volumn 50, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 54-60

  Thalmann, F ^a,b,c   Dasgupta, C ^a,b   Feinberg, D ^c  

^a INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE   (India)

^b JAWAHARLAL NEHRU CENTRE FOR ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH   (India)

^c LABORATOIRE DE CRISTALLOGRAPHIE   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034164124     PISSN: 02955075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1209/epl/i2000-00234-2     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. SESHADRI R. and WESTERVELT R. A., Phys. Rev. B, 46 (1992) 5150.
2. ANDREI E. Y. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., 60 (1988) 2765.
3. BLATTER G. et al., Rev. Mod. Phys., 66 (1994) 1125.
4. ZELDOV E. et al., Nature, 375 (1995) 373.
5. NATTERMANN T., Phys. Rev. Lett., 64 (1990) 2454.
6. GIAMARCHI T. and LE DOUSSAL P., Phys. Rev. B, 52 (1995) 1242.
7. CUBITT R. et al., Nature, 365 (1993) 407.
8. MENON G. and DASGUPTA C., Phys. Rev. Lett., 73 (1994) 1023.
9. KHAVKOVITCH B. et al., Phys. Rev. B, 56 (1997) R517.
10. SAFAR H. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., 70 (1993) 3800.
11. FISHER D. S., FISHER M. P. A. and HUSE D. A., Phys. Rev. B, 43 (1990) 130.
12. The question of whether a true thermodynamic glass phase exists in superconductors with random point pinning is controversial - see, e.g., BOKIL H. S. and YOUNG A. P., Phys. Rev. Lett., 74 (1995) 3021.
13. PITARD E. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., 74 (1995) 4361.
14. MÉZARD M. and PARISI G., J. Phys. A, 29 (1996) 6515.
15. ERTAŞ, D. and NELSON D. R., Physica C, 271 (1996) 79.
16. WOODCOCK, L. V. and ANGELL C. A., Phys. Rev. Lett., 47 (1981) 1129.
17. RINTOUL M. and TORQUATO S., Phys. Rev. Lett., 77 (1996) 4198.
18. RAMAKRISHNAN T. V. and YUSSOUFF M., Phys. Rev. B, 19 (1979) 2775.
19. MÉZARD M., PARISI G. and VIRASORO M. A., Spin Glass Theory and Beyond (World Scientific) 1987.
20. MONASSON R., Phys. Rev. Lett., 75 (1995) 1170.
21. KIRKPATRICK T. R. and THIRUMALAI D., Phys. Rev. B, 36 (1987) 5388.
22. DASGUPTA C., Europhys. Lett., 20 (1992) 131.
23. SASTRY S., DE BENEDETTI P. G. and STILLINGER F. H., Nature, 393 (1998) 554.
24. CARDENAS M., FRANZ S. and PARISI G., J. Phys. A, 31 (1998) L163.
25. g = 1.19. The discrepancy comes from a different discretization procedure. Given a solution on a real-space grid with spacing Δr, and a hard-sphere diameter d, there is an uncertainty Δη/η = 3Δr/d in the value of the associated packing fraction, which accounts for the difference between the two numerical results.
26. ZERAH G., J. Comput. Phys., 61 (1985) 280.